Council Denies Police Camera Funding

Council has again shot down the police department’s request for funding to put CCTV security cameras all along the Downtown Mall.  #

7 Responses to “Council Denies Police Camera Funding”

  • Good, and hopefully they understand the word “no” this time instead of coming back again and again like a 3 year old.

    We already have little enough privacy in our lives without being on camera all the time, though I’m sure there are enough private cameras on the mall to cover most everything.

  • Ahhhhh…Waldo… watch your bias in your wording. Fox has lost it creditability as much as the Guardian. Your smart, you will get it.

  • I have absolutely no idea of what you’re talking about. It’s a straightforward, single-sentence story. I’m perfectly happy to interject my opinion, and have never claimed to do otherwise, but I haven’t done so here.

  • “shot down” brings a value judgement with it, as opposed to say “denied.” So I will go out on a limb and say you were opposed to the cameras, which is why I bring it to attention. Your board, your rules as they say: with you always being very candid when it is your opinion. But a certain value judgement seemed to slip into the wording.

    That and any time I can give some grief to a liberal media person….well…I admit it….its like crack to me… ;-)

  • “shot down” brings a value judgement with it, as opposed to say “denied.”

    I call bullshit. There’s no value judgement behind “shot down.” In fact, if anything, I think it’d be the opposite of your claim. To shoot something down implies that one thing was in flight—an airplane, a bird, whatever—and something else was safely on the ground. “Sniper” is the word we use for somebody who does that, and there’s a reason why our opponents have “snipers” and we have “sharpshooters”—because it’s seen as cowardly to hide at a great distance and shoot things down.

    Nope, I’m definitely not buying it. The onus is on you to prove that there’s a value judgement behind the phrase “shot down,” and I’ll happily wager that you can’t do so.

  • Nope. If a girl “shoots down” your attempt at a date it is definitely a bigger deal than a “gentle no.”

    Your playing with semantics. But let me ask you this, when you were asking girls out on dates would you prefer to have been “shot down,” or received a simple , “no” of denial.

  • Now you’re talking about something different, Dan. Before, your implication was that saying the request was “shot down” carried with it a value judgment about the merits of the request. That, as I’ve demonstrated, is entirely wrong. But what you’re saying now is that “shot down” means that the request was denied in a fashion more significant than it could have been. On that I agree—that’s precisely what I meant to say.

    The police have repeatedly sought approval and funding for this project, and they have repeatedly failed to do so. This time, Chief Longo went to Council and asked for funding for several efforts, bundling them all together in a single request, and they all were denied, despite the support of some local business and resident groups. Council said that they’re too expensive and that there’s no evidence that they’ll do any good. “Shot down” is definitely the phrase to describe that.

Comments are currently closed.